[2] Under his leadership, the Office of the Inspector General (OIG) revealed that up to two-thirds of certain Global Fund grants may have been lost to corruption through forged documents, improper bookkeeping, the diversion of donated prescription drugs to the black market, and other irregularities.
A news release issued by the Global Fund on the removal of Parsons as Inspector General stated that the Board "made its decision based on factors including: a performance review; an independent external peer review of the audit function; and a report to the Board by its Audit and Ethics Committee.
"[9] Parsons recruited Robert Appleton, a former US federal prosecutor and chairman of the United Nations Procurement Task Force, to assist him at the Global Fund.
It was the United States – the fund's largest supporter – that pushed in 2005 for the appointment of a strong inspector general to fight fraud.
[13] Initially, the Global Fund announced that it would increase resources for the OIG in the wake of these findings,[13] but its Board subsequently considered scaling back investigations and releasing less information about them publicly and to donors.
"[6] The Health Care Renewal blog also condemned the decision, urging the Global Fund to make assurances that they "are not out to get whistleblowers, including their own internal watchdogs.
"[17] However, on the evening prior to his termination, Parsons was called to a session of the Board to discuss and defend his future position as Inspector General.
According to the Associated Press, "the board chairman, Simon Bland, and the head of its audit committee, Graham Joscelyne, each said they were unconcerned whether U.S. lawmakers might perceive the firing as an infringement on the office.
"[2] But according to AHF's General Counsel,"the only way Mr. Parsons' efforts could be considered unsatisfactory is if the Board felt he had not found enough waste, fraud, and abuse in Global Fund programs.
"[6] Following Parson's dismissal, the Board said that it recognised the need to maintain continuity in the work of the audits and investigations currently underway, while it searched for a new Inspector General.
Hours later, Parsons emailed Bland and the audit and ethics committee to say it was clear “that you want me out of the Global Fund, and that your true intention is to weaken the function _ simply because you don’t like what we find and report upon.” “There is no credible basis for criticism of me or my office worthy of this hostility and degree of attack that I have been subject to,” Parsons wrote in an email.
“The world will see this for what it truly is _ an intentional effort by you and Graham to weaken the function, diminish the office and penalize me for simply doing my job ...", he wrote.
According to the Government Accountability Project, a whistleblower protection organisation, "when an organization confronts operational shortcomings like this, management and the board have two choices.